National Assembly - 20 March 2002
WEDNESDAY, 20 MARCH 2002 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 14:01.
The Deputy Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS - see col 000.
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES - see that book.
NOTICES OF MOTION
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) the Commonwealth Chairpersons' Committee consisting of President
Mbeki, President Obasanjo and Prime Minister Howard has
suspended Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth for one year;
(b) the issue will be revisited in one year, having regard for
progress made in Zimbabwe based on the Commonwealth Harare
Declaration principles, including future management of elections
and not re-elections as we are made to believe;
(c) the Committee stated that land is at the core of the crisis in
Zimbabwe and that the Commonwealth is ready to assist with the
land issue and economic recovery; and
(d) the Committee has not repudiated the outcome of the elections;
and
(2) welcomes the role played by President Mbeki in facilitating an intelligent decision which is in the interest of the people of Zimbabwe and the Southern African region.
[Applause.]
Mr E K MOORCROFT: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move:
That the House -
(1) endorses the decision of the Commonwealth committee to suspend Zimbabwe’s membership over the flawed presidential election in that country;
(2) notes with approval that President Thabo Mbeki, as a member of that committee, agreed that the actions of Zanu-PF during the election warranted this punitive step; and
(3) recognises that the ANC’s absurd view that the election was credible is revealed as even more embarrassing and confused than it appeared yesterday.
[Applause.]
Mr V B NDLOVU: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) compliments the Durban Organised Crime Unit and Metro Police for uncovering the fraud scam dubbed the ``419 scam’’ run by the Nigerian and Chinese businessmen and drug lords;
(2) further gives due accolades to the said police officers for having arrested the masterminds behind this shady scam in which five computers that were used to manufacture the documents used in both the 419 and the Black Dollar scams were confiscated;
(3) realises that this plot had only the intention to derail the economy and thus enrich only its hatchers in that $2 million fake dollars, a stolen luxury car, electronic equipment, 600 British pounds, hundreds of genuine US dollars …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Your time has expired, hon member.
Mr V B NDLOVU: Angikaqedi ukuyifunda. [I have not finished reading it.] The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! The motion will be printed.
Mr V B NDLOVU: Hho! [Ho!]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House:
(1) notes that the ANC members of Parliament and the provincial legislature in the Western Cape, councillors and over 600 members of the ANC …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon Chief Whip, the procedure is that no one member can move two motions in the House. Can we have somebody else to read that motion on behalf of the ANC?
Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House:
(1) notes that the ANC members of Parliament … [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order, hon members! Continue, hon Deputy Chief Whip.
Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Chairperson, am I protected?
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: You are protected. Continue and read the motion.
Mr G Q M DOIDGE: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that the ANC members of Parliament in the national Parliament, the provincial legislature in the Western Cape, councillors and over 600 members of the ANC descended on Wallacedene to volunteer to register all residents who qualify for social grants;
(2) further notes that this initiative is part of the Letsema campaign of the ANC;
(3) believes that the Letsema campaign has received overwhelming support from the masses of our people following the call made in the 8 January 2002 statement; and
(4) applauds the initiatives made by these public representatives.
[Applause.]
Dr B L GELDENHUYS: Chairperson, I give notice that I shall move on behalf of the New NP on the next sitting day of the House:
That the House -
(1) notes that the rand increased sharply after the announcement by the Commonwealth Troika, of which President Mbeki is a prominent member, that Zimbabwe will be suspended for one year;
(2) urges SADC to follow suit, given the fact that the SADC Parliamentary Forum observer team also found the elections wanting, measured against their own criteria for free and fair elections; and (3) agrees that such a step would strengthen investor confidence in the region to the benefit of the successful implementation of Nepad.
Mr J T MASEKA: Chairperson, I will move on behalf of the UDM at the next sitting of this House:
That the House -
(1) notes that World TB Day is to be celebrated on Sunday 24 March 2002;
(2) further notes that TB kills 2 million people per year and that the breakdown in health services, the spread of HIV/Aids and the emergence of multi-drug-resistant TB are contributing to the worsening impact of this disease;
(3) calls on Government to implement comprehensive programmes that address the eradication of poverty and inequality at both country and global levels, noting that an investment in health is an investment in potential;
(4) also calls on Government to provide cost-effective health intervention, which is widely distributed, in combination with an increased public awareness; and
(5) further calls on the corporate sector, political leaders …
[Time expired.]
Ms N S MTSWENI: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that United Nations Secretary-General Mr Kofi Anan accused Israel of waging warfare against the people of Palestine;
(2) believes that the everlasting solution to the Middle East problem lies in a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the Middle East, and Israelis and Palestinians themselves should play the leading role in pursuit of a negotiated settlement; and
(3) reiterates our call for the establishment of a sovereign state of Palestine and the right of the state of Israel to exist within secured borders.
[Applause.]
Dr C P MULDER: Mnr die Voorsitter, hiermee gee ek kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting sal voorstel:
Dat die Huis -
(1) daarvan kennis neem dat -
(a) die Vryheidsfront die besluit van die Statebond dat die pas
afgelope presidentsverkiesing in Zimbabwe nie vry en regverdig
was nie en daarom Zimbabwe met onmiddellike effek vir 12 maande
uit die Statebond geskors het, verwelkom;
(b) hierdie nie slegs as 'n strafmaatreël moet dien nie, maar dat
dit die eerste stap behoort te wees wat sal lei tot die
nietigverklaring van die 2002-presidentsverkiesing in Zimbabwe;
en
(c) 'n nuwe verkiesing so gou as moontlik in Zimbabwe gehou moet
word onder die beheer en toesig van die internasionale
gemeenskap; en
(2) na aanleiding van die gebeure in Zimbabwe en die internasionale gemeenskap se reaksie daarop, ‘n beroep doen op die ANC-regering dat hulle hulle nou, in belang van Suid-Afrika, vir eens en vir altyd in die openbaar sal distansieer van die outokratiese en diktatoriale optredes van mnr Robert Mugabe. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Dr C P MULDER: Mr Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the sitting day of the House I shall move:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) the Freedom Front welcomes the decision by the Commonwealth to
suspend Zimbabwe's membership for twelve months with immediate
effect because the recent presidential elections there were not
free and fair;
(b) this should not only serve as a punitive measure, but that it
ought to be the first step towards declaring the 2002
presidential elections in Zimbabwe null and void; and
(c) new elections in Zimbabwe should be held as soon as possible
under the guidance and control of the international community;
and
(2) following on the events in Zimbabwe and the reaction to these by the international community, appeals to the ANC Government, in the interests of South Africa, to distance themselves now once and for all publicly from the autocratic and dictatorial actions of Mr Robert Mugabe.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, I shall move on the next sitting day of the House on behalf of the MF:
That the House -
(1) notes that -
(a) a night out to party turned into a tragedy for the Challen
family of Durban;
(b) two Saturdays ago a brawl broke out at a Point night club in
Durban;
(c) what was to be a small misunderstanding resulted in death and
serious injuries; and
(d) according to Charmaine Challen, her husband and his brother were
beaten by the night club's bouncers after a brawl had broken out
in the club;
(e) the club owner claims that there was a fight but denies any of
his bouncers being involved; and
(f) thus far no arrests have been made;
(2) calls for -
(a) an inquest to be conducted into the death of Neil Challen and
the assault of his brother; and
(b) the perpetrators to be brought to justice; and
(3) requests that urgent attention be given to the handling of such horrific occurrences. [Applause.]
Mr K A MOLOTO: Chairperson, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes that the Minister of Social Development, the hon Zola Skweyiya, delivered the Budget Vote speech in the House yesterday;
(2) believes that the intention to reach out to all eligible recipients of social grants confirms the commitment of the ANC-led Government to roll back the frontiers of poverty; and
(3) supports the Social Development Department Budget Vote as a practical step towards poverty alleviation.
[Applause.]
Mrs B N SONO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move:
That the House - (1) notes with dismay the fact that as a result of a political deal between the ANC and the New NP the independent post of Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa) has been promised to the New NP;
(2) further notes that in democratic parliaments around the world, the opposition chooses the chair of Scopa;
(3) also notes that it is unheard of for a government to co-opt a small opposition party and then pretend that this will strengthen the independence of Scopa in its oversight role over all government departments and ministers; and
(4) therefore believes that this shabby deal with the Nationalists will undermine the committee and not strengthen it.
[Applause.]
Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Chairperson, I give notice that I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the House -
(1) sadly notes the tense demonstrations by the students of ML Sultan Technikon in Durban yesterday, as this will affect their academic activity;
(2) further notes that these students disrupted the mobility of traffic and intimidated the students of the Natal Technikon as they charged at them;
(3) recognises that these students are alleged to have been demonstrating against the merger of their technikon with the Natal Technikon; and
(4) therefore calls upon everyone concerned to exercise restraint as negotiations on mergers are taking place.
Mr N B FIHLA: Chair, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:
That the House -
(1) notes with concern that incidence of rape and sodomy are evident in prison;
(2) believes that the magnitude of the problem requires all necessary steps to be taken to ensure that a positive prison culture is fostered;
(3) commends the Friends Against Abuse programme set up at Pollsmoor Prison to address sexual exploitation and rape of prisoners;
(4) further commends the Friends Against Abuse Committee for their tireless work in the 14 months they have been active at Pollsmoor Prison; and
(5) believes that the success of the programme is testimony to the efforts being made by the Department of Correctional Services to be partners with the community in the interest of the community and those that are entrusted to the department’s care.
[Applause.]
Mr C R REDCLIFFE: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the New NP:
That the House - (1) notes -
(a) the intention of the Department of Commerce of the United States
Administration to investigate the complaints of American
producers of canned pears that their commercial interests are
being undermined; and
(b) that this may adversely affect the South African producers in
respect of the preferential ad valorem duties arising from the
implementation of the African Growth and Opportunities Act
(AGOA); and
(2) calls on the Minister of Trade and Industry to urgently intervene so that the terms of the AGOA are strictly adhered to and that the 15,3% ad valorem duty in respect of canned pears is not unilaterally removed.
Mr D G MKONO: Chairperson, I will move on behalf of the UDM at the next sitting of this House:
That the House, on the eve of the Easter weekend -
(1) appeals to all road users during this long weekend to be alert at all times, refrain from drinking and driving, keep to the speed limits, and look out for the potential mistakes of other road users;
(2) makes a special appeal to all pedestrians and other road users to pay particular attention to the rules regarding the presence of pedestrians on our roads, given the high rate of pedestrians that die every year;
(3) expresses its support and good wishes to all law-enforcement officials who will be tasked to enforce the law on our roads;
(4) expresses its hope that the ``Arrive Alive’’ campaign will be implemented effectively this year and wishes the Minister of Transport and his department, and all provinces good luck in their efforts; and
(5) calls on all South Africans to ensure that serious accidents and deaths on our roads in the coming days are kept to a minimum …
[Time expired.] [Applause.]
HUMAN RIGHTS DAY
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that tomorrow, 21 March, is Human Rights Day;
(2) further notes that the Constitution of South Africa enshrines the rights of all people in our country and affirms the democratic values of dignity, equality and freedom;
(3) recognises that these rights include equality regardless of race, gender, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth, and that no person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more of these grounds;
(4) also notes that other rights enshrined in the Constitution include human dignity, freedom and security of the person, privacy, freedom of religion, belief and opinion, freedom of expression, and other fundamental rights;
(5) recommits itself to protecting and entrenching these rights; and
(6) calls on all Members to promote a culture of respect for human rights and to work to ensure that all members of our society are aware of and understand these rights as well as their responsibilities to their fellow citizens - and to society as a whole - that emanate from these rights.
Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, I did not get a redrafted copy of that motion. I am not sure if I heard correctly, but I just want to check if the clause that I discussed with the Chief Whip of the Majority Party has been removed. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: [Inaudible.]
Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, if that clause has not been removed, then the ACDP wants to register its objection.
Dr C P MULDER: Chairperson, on a point of order: I need clarity from you and a ruling on the following matter. I have been under the impression that in terms of the Rules of Parliament, motions without notice should be unanimous and if any party disagrees with such a motion, it cannot go through on the day. I want you to please look at the Rules and then give a ruling in this regard. [Interjections.]
Mr A C NEL: Chairperson, if I may address you. When this matter was addressed in the Chief Whips’ Forum this morning, the ADCP indicated that they might have a problem with one clause. We then tried to negotiate with them, but could not reach consensus.
However, we agreed that they would object to the content of the motion, but not to the motion being put. We discussed this matter with all the other parties, including the DP, and there was an agreement that it should be done this way. If parties now want to change that, I really do not know … [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, could I give a ruling on the point of order raised by Dr Mulder. The motion was moved and I posed a question as to whether there was any objection. There was no objection in the first instance that the motion be moved. The hon Green then wanted his objection to be recorded on that portion which he does not agree with. In other words, there was no objection to the motion being moved. The motion will then go through. [Applause.]
Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, I am a little confused by the way you explained this. The ACDP objected to the content of the motion, and I want to make that clear.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Your objection will be recorded. Is there any other motion without objection? [Laughter.] I am sorry, motion without notice!
Dr C P MULDER: Chairperson, on a further point of order: With all due respect, I just need final clarity from the Chair. Do the Rules therefore make provision for a party to object to the content of a motion without notice, and for the motion to still be put to the House and carried? Is that what the Rules provide for? We need clarity, because we are talking about a future principle here.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! We will recheck the Rules and then rule on that.
Agreed to (African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).
GOOD WISHES FOR THE ACP-EU
(Draft Resolution)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House -
(1) notes that the ACP-EU Joint Assembly, which convened this week in Cape Town, was created out of a common desire to bring together the elected representatives of the European Community - the Members of the European Parliament - and the representatives - both elected and non-elected - of the African, Caribbean and Pacific states (“ACP countries”) that have signed the Lomé Convention and that it is the only institution of its kind in the world;
(2) recognises that it is the only international assembly in which the representatives of various countries sit together regularly with the aim of promoting the interdependence of North and South;
(3) acknowledges that a substantial part of the work of the Joint Assembly is directed towards promoting human rights and democracy and the common values of humanity, and this has produced joint commitments undertaken within the framework of the UN conferences; and
(4) welcomes the ACP-EU to Cape Town and wishes the assembly every success in achieving its goals, which will have immeasurable benefit to our country, our region and the world as a whole.
Agreed to.
APPOINTMENT OF AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR NOMINATION OF PERSONS TO FILL EXISTING VACANCY ON THE COMMISSION FOR GENDER EQUALITY
(Draft Resolution)
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House, in accordance with section 193(5) of the Constitution, appoint an ad hoc committee to nominate persons to fill the existing vacancy on the Commission for Gender Equality, the committee -
(1) to consist of 27 members in the following proportions: ANC 14, DP 2, all other parties 1;
(2) to exercise those powers in Rule 138 that may assist it in carrying out its task;
(3) to take into consideration the list of candidates proposed by interested parties which will be referred to the committee; and
(4) to complete its task by 24 May 2002.
Agreed to.
APPOINTMENT OF MR M COETZEE AS DEPUTY SECRETARY TO PARLIAMENT
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name in the Order Paper, as follows: That the House, on the recommendation of the Speaker and the Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, appoints Mr M Coetzee as Deputy Secretary to Parliament with effect from 15 April 2002.
Agreed to.
EXTENSION OF TRIAL-RUN PERIOD OF QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name in the Order Paper, as follows:
That, with reference to the resolution adopted by the House on 13 November 2001, the period for the trial run of questions for oral reply be further extended until 28 June 2002.
Question put: That the motion be agreed to.
Division demanded.
The House divided: AYES: - 218: Abram, S; Ainslie, A R; Asmal, A K; Aucamp, C; Bakker, D M; Baloyi, S F; Bekker, H J; Benjamin, J; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, G B; Blaas, A; Blanche, J P I; Bloem, D V; Bogopane, H I; Booi, M S; Botha, N G W; Buthelezi, M N; Cachalia, I M; Carrim, Y I; Chalmers, J; Chauke, H P; Chiba, L; Chikane, M M; Chohan-Kota, F I; Coetzee-Kasper, M P; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; De Lange, J H; Diale, L N; Dithebe, S L; Dlali, D M; Dlamini, B O; Doidge, G Q M; Dowry, J J; Duma, N M; Dyani, M M Z; Ebrahim, E I; Fankomo, F C; Fihla, N B; Gandhi, E; Geldenhuys, B L; George, M E; Gerber, P A; Gogotya, N J; Goniwe, M T; Goosen, A D; Gous, S J; Green, L M; Greyling, C H F; Gumede, D M; Gxowa, N B; Hajaig, F; Hanekom, D A; Hendrickse, P A C; Herandien, C B; Hlaneki, C J M; Hlangwana, N L; Jassat, E E; Jeffery, J H; Joemat, R R; Kalako, M U; Kannemeyer, B W; Kasienyane, O R; Kati, J Z; Kekana, N N; Kgarimetsa, J J; Kgauwe, Q J; Kgwele, L M; Komphela, B M; Kota, Z A; Kotwal, Z; Lamani, N E; Landers, L T; Le Roux, J W; Lishiva, T E; Lockey, D; Louw, J T; Louw, S K; Luthuli, A N; Lyle, A G; Mabe, L; Mabena, D C; Madlala- Routledge, N C; Magazi, M N; Magwanishe, G; Mahomed, F; Maimane, D S; Makanda, W G; Malebana, H F; Maloney, L; Malumise, M M; Maphalala, M A; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Martins, B A D; Masithela, N H; Masutha, M T; Mathibela, N F; Maunye, M M; Mbombo, N D; Mbuyazi, L R; Mfundisi, I S; Mguni, B A; Middleton, N S; Mnandi, P N; Mngomezulu, G P; Mnumzana, S K; Modise, T R; Modisenyane, L J; Moeketse, K M; Mofokeng, T R; Mohamed, I J; Mohlala, R J B; Mokoena, D A; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B G; Moloi, J; Moloto, K A; Mongwaketse, S J; Montsitsi, S D; Moonsamy, K; Morkel, C M; Morobi, D M; Moropa, R M; Morutoa, M R; Mothoagae, P K; Motubatse, S D; Mpahlwa, M; Mpaka, H M; Mpontshane, A M; Mshudulu, S A; Mthembu, B; Mtsweni, N S; Mutsila, I; Mzizi, M A; Mzondeki, M J G; Nash, J H; Ncube, B; Ndlovu, V B; Ndou, R S; Ndzanga, R A; Nel, A C; Nel, A H; Nene, N M; Newhoudt-Druchen, W S; Ngaleka, N E; Ngcengwane, N D; Ngculu, L V J; Ngubeni, J M; Nhlengethwa, D G; Nobunga, B J; Nqakula, C; Nqodi, S B; Ntombela, S H; Ntshulana-Bhengu, N R; Ntuli, B M; Ntuli, S B; Nzimande, L P M; Odendaal, W A; Olckers, M E; Olifant, D A A; Phadagi, M G; Pheko, S E M; Phohlela, S; Pieterse, R D; Rabie, P J; Radebe, B A; Rajbally, S; Ramgobin, M; Ramotsamai, C M P; Rasmeni, S M; Redcliffe, C R; Roopnarain, U; Saloojee, E; Schippers, J; Schneeman, G D; Schoeman, E A; Scott, M I; Sekgobela, P S; September, R K; Shabangu, S; Shilubana, T P; Sibiya, M S M; Sigcawu, A N; Sigwela, E M; Sikakane, M R; Simmons, S; Sithole, D J; Skhosana, W M; Skweyiya, Z S T; Smith, P F; Smith, V G; Solo, B M; Solomon, G; Sonjica, B P; Sosibo, J E; Sotyu, M M; Southgate, R M; Swart, S N; Thabethe, E; Tinto, B; Tolo, L J; Turok, B; Twala, N M; Uys, P; Vadi, I; Van den Heever, R P Z; Van der Merwe, A S; Van der Merwe, S C; Van Deventer, F J; Van Jaarsveld, A Z A; Van Wyk, A (Annelize); Van Wyk, J F; Van Wyk, N; Vos, S C; Woods, G; Xingwana, L M T; Zondo, R P; Zuma, J G.
NOES: - 31: Andrew, K M; Bell, B G; Borman, G M; Bruce, N S; Clelland, N J; Cupido, P W; Da Camara, M L; Delport, J T; Ellis, M J; Farrow, S B; Gibson, D H M; Gore, V C; Grobler, G A J; Jankielsohn, R; Kalyan, S V; Lee, T D; Lowe, C M; McIntosh, G B D; Moorcroft, E K; Mulder, C P; Schalkwyk, P J; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semple, J A; Seremane, W J; Smuts, M; Sono, B N; Swart, P S; Taljaard, R; Van Niekerk, A I; Waters, M.
Motion accordingly agreed to.
COMPLETION OF TASK OF AD HOC COMMITTEE ON POWERS AND PRIVILEGES OF
PARLIAMENT
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Mr Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows: That, with reference to the resolution adopted by the House on 2 November 2001, the Ad Hoc Committee on Powers and Privileges of Parliament is to complete its task by no later than 31 May 2002.
Agreed to.
THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF SOUTH AFRICA IN ENGENDERING A CULTURE OF HUMAN RIGHTS
(Subject for Discussion)
Mr G SOLOMON: Mr Chairperson …
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon members, allow the hon member to be heard, please. You may proceed, hon member.
Mr G SOLOMON: Chairperson, if there is a concept that captures and epitomises the ethos of our new constitutional dispensation then it is certainly the concept of justice, underpinned by a clear and vigorous concept of rights. This is the only basis for unifying this nation, the social fabric of which was devastated by the violation of every single human right known and practised by civilised nations. This is also the only context for the expression of social, economic and political rights, in which the legal system was used as a means to deny human rights.
South Africa is unique in that Chapter 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, has a justiciable Bill of Rights the key elements of which were born out of the liberation struggle, expressing the aspirations of the oppressed people and meeting with more than internationally accepted criteria. This is the Freedom Charter adopted at the Congress of the People in 1955.
From the point of view of fundamental human rights, the Freedom Charter was amongst the most advanced documents of its time. In simple, clear, understandable and coherent language it defends the fundamental, legal, political, cultural and civil rights of people. It spells out the social and economic rights that were adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations only in 1966, that is, a decade later.
The Freedom Charter refers to cultural and religious rights, which were only formulated in 1980s. The declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief was proclaimed by the General Assembly only on 25 November 1981. Cedaw, or the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, was adopted by the General Assembly in 1979 and came into force on 3 September 1981. This convention was preceded by three decades by the Federation of SA Women which adopted the Women’s Charter in 1955, committing the organisation to the removal of all laws and practices that discriminated against women, and stressing the dual nature of women’s struggle for equality - equality with men and equality in the country of their birth. This, indeed, was unprecedented in world history.
In celebrating Human Rights Day we need to be mindful of the following: firstly, the injustices and particularly the violation of human rights of the past; secondly, remember and honour those who suffered for justice, freedom and human rights and particularly those who sacrificed their lives; thirdly, reaffirm that human rights in South Africa apply to all who live in South Africa; fourthly, celebrate those rights which we have achieved thus far; and, fifthly, continue to struggle until the playing fields are levelled as far as human rights are concerned.
The protection and propagation of the supremacy of the Constitution and the
Bill of Rights devolve upon the community as a whole. This specific task,
however, is the concern of the Department of Justice and Constitutional
Development - its Minister, Deputy Minister, director-general, staff and
the portfolio and select committees. The Freedom Charter has assigned to
us, in simple language, the task to ensure that all shall be equal before
the law,'' andthat all shall enjoy human rights’’.
At the practical level, it is the task of the department to render accessible, fair, speedy and cost-effective the administration of justice in the interests of a safe and secure South Africa. But it is not only the function of the judicial system to deal with those who break the law by effective investigation, prosecution and conviction. More importantly, it is also the function of the judicial system, through the courts if the demand arises, to secure those social and economic rights which are within the capacity of the state - to see that this is done and, if necessary, to enforce it.
In order for us to be able to do this, it was necessary to change the apartheid judicial system from the protector of white overlordship or baasskap to the protector of the democratic Constitution, basic human rights and the rule of law.
It is well known that before 1994 the law enforcement agencies, the police, the army and the special security forces acted as agents of terror and not as protectors of human rights. These instruments of domination, besides maintaining political power and state security, also directly served a distorted economy, by keeping the disenfranchised masses under control, keeping them economically dependent, yes, keeping them poor. Unprecedented transformation was achieved since 1994 with the establishment of the Constitutional Court, a representative and truly independent judiciary, which includes women, a Public Protector, a Human Rights Commission and a Gender Equality Commission.
We have also passed through this House a large number of pieces of legislation impacting upon the procurement of human rights. Despite numerous challenges, the basis is firmly and permanently laid for the procurement of those basic human rights for which so many have sacrificed so much for so long. [Applause.]
Ms M SMUTS: Chairperson, the subject of today is strangely chosen. Achievement is not the way I would describe the South African stance on human rights in respect of the two great issues of our day. [Interjections.] Aids is one of those issues. Now the socioeconomic rights and their enforceability was a subject dear to the old ANC’s heart when we negotiated the Bill of Rights. The form that the enforceability took was rationality review. Yet on Aids the Government is not rational and therefore it is appealing against the very idea that a court can exercise rationality review.
The Human Rights Commission, which should guard our rights, also against the Government of the day, was all set to appear as an amicus in the TAC’s successful rationality challenge, but it withdrew after the intervention of Government lawyers, because it has learnt the lesson that it gets funding and favour only when it follows the Government’s agenda notably on race issues.
The other issue of the day is South Africa’s stance on the rape of democracy and human rights in Zimbabwe, the subversion of political rights, the destruction of free speech, the sacking of judges from a once proud bench, the torture. The failure of the ANC to call these things by their name, the pretence that the election result reflects the will of the people has brought the question home: could it happen here? It is useless to pretend that that is not the question on people’s minds this Human Rights Day.
It must be very confusing for the ANC to be instructed to vote one way yesterday only to see the President assist in suspending Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth in the UK later on the same day; perhaps he is as surprised as they are. It is futile to hope the suspension signals a change of heart and so the question remains: How different is South Africa from Zimbabwe? The short answer in my view is that it will be as different as we make it. And that means not waiting 20 years, like the Zimbabweans, before mounting opposition and it means exercising the vigilance that is the price of the liberties that we have enshrined.
Now vigilance means not falling for the anticolonial and racial blame game that has dominated South Africa over roughly the same period as the post- referendum assault on the Zimbabwean opposition in the name of anticolonialism.
Vigilance means seeing things which are the same. Now both the Zimbabwean and South African governments have introduced a strange time warp in their race campaigns. President Mugabe has been attacking colonial Britain as if the last 22 years never happened. Here the ghosts of colonial times very long past were exhumed and paraded in revisionist versions of our history in a whole series of presidential speeches and pronouncements, starting in
- There was the one about Van Riebeeck’s almond hedge. There was the one about the virtually genocidal annihilation of the San which was ascribed to whites, whereas it was performed by black, Khoi and white pastoralists.
There were many such speeches. Apartheid was also revived and prime ministers like Malan attacked with such gusto at the race conference in 2000 that one could have sworn that they were still over there in the Old Assembly Chamber, booming out the baasskap message, while in truth the last old National Party ruler had departed a decade earlier, and in truth the ANC had been caucusing in the Old Assembly Chamber for a good six years. A strange time warp!
I must say that the speech of my colleague preceding me was marked by something similar. He spoke as though this was still 1996.
I felt in 2000 that we had reached a really low point with the ANC’s strange, disturbing submission on media racism to the Human Rights Commission. Citing J M Coetzee’s prize-winning novel Disgrace, the ANC recounted the conversation between Lucy and her father after her rape, when she accepts, in the ANC’s description, that ``to secure her personal protection, she might have to marry one of her black farmworkers and cede the land to him.’’ Why did the ANC choose this passage? On the ANC’s version, to illustrate that, and I quote:
J M Coetzee makes the point that five years after our liberation whites continue to believe in a stereotype of the African as immoral and amoral, savage, violent, disrespectful of private property, driven by Satanic impulses …
Members will recognise the litany; it appeared in many ANC and, I regret to
say, presidential speeches, savage'',Satanic’’ and so forth. Now it is
absurd nonsense to assert such a thing, but the use of the passage did make
the most ominous political sense against the brooding background of
official South African silence on land invasions in Zimbabwe, as I wrote in
April 2000. In the event, the Human Rights Commission’s report on media
racism was itself one of the really low points in our new human rights
history, dealing with ``social analysis’’ rather than mere legal
certainties, and mud-wrestling the hapless media in the slimy sediment of a
subliminal terrain called the deep recesses of one’s consciousness.
The traumatised media never analysed the report, an early danger signal in itself. Now of course the hon Minister Essop Pahad is embarking on a media diversity agency in the name, explicitly, of the fight against colonialism of a special kind. Is it not time that those hon ANC members who know better say ``not in my name’’ to statements like the ANC media submission and to the Zimbabwe election report?
I think we were doing very well in the rainbow nation South Africa. That is in fact when we were achieving the engendering of a human rights culture. I think it is unforgivable that the racial atmosphere has been deliberately soured over the last two and half years and that any dissent is greeted with a charge of racism.
I notice that there is a new form of insult in this House. Twice in the last two weeks DP members have been called Rhodesians. Neither of them is from Zimbabwe. This is a new kind of insult - ``Rhodesians’’.
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! Hon member, are you rising on a point of order?
Mr D M GUMEDE: Yes. Chairperson, I would like to ask whether the member will take a question right now? [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES: Order! I asked whether you were rising on a point of order.
Ms M SMUTS: Sir, I regret my time is all but up and I would like to complete what I have to say.
Prof Laurie Schlemmer, in research before the World Conference on Racism last year, showed that two thirds of African South Africans have not fallen even for their own political leader’s attempts to challenge the legitimacy of opposition by calling it racist. In the wake of Zimbabwe those figures will rise. It is still possible to stop the slide provided one does not allow the race rhetoric to mute one’s opposition. We have had some success. We were unpopular two years ago for opposing the Equality Act because it was unconstitutional for the Justice Minister to appoint the judges. Last year we had the great satisfaction of seeing the Ministry announce that it would amend that Act. It is still possible to stop the slide. The message is this: South Africa will be different, if we make it different. [Applause.]
Ms B P SONJICA: Chairperson, I do not think that I will waste my time by responding to the hon Dene Smuts. [Interjections.]
The President once said that South Africa has two nations: There is a privileged nation and an underprivileged one. The hon Dene Smuts, belonging to the privileged nation, cannot understand the achievements that this particular Government has attained to engender the culture of human rights. [Applause.] It is only the people who come from the underprivileged nation who will understand what this Government has achieved to engender human rights in this country.
Let me first congratulate Comrade Ronnie Kasrils on the recognition that he showed to 14 women for their role in the water sector. This gesture is unprecedented in the world and it speaks for itself on the achievements of South Africa under this Government in engendering a culture of human rights. I was humbled to receive one of these awards along with our women veterans and activists for rural development in the name of MaTshepo Khumbani and MaLydia Ngwenya. There is a lot that these two mothers can teach us about volunteerism and I congratulate them sincerely. [Applause.]
The women of South Africa, under the leadership of the Federation of South African Women, made demands which they were to present at the people’s congress in 1955. Among these demands were the following: sufficient food for all the people; reserves to become food-producing areas and not reservoirs for cheap labour; indoor sanitation, water supply and proper lighting in homes; and equal rights for all the people of South Africa.
Although I have to confine myself to the right to sanitation and water supply, I do want to say that the ANC-led Government was so responsive to these demands, which the previous regime had violated, that today women, regardless of their race, enjoy equal opportunities. My focus will be on the impact of water supply on the lives of people and women in particular.
In order for us to respond to the question before us we have to understand water as a basic right and link it to the understanding that women’s rights are human rights. We should also understand that lack of access to clean, potable water is a factor for underdevelopment and therefore a denial of a basic human right. The lack or absence of clean, potable water results in or exacerbates poverty for obvious reasons, and women suffer most in such circumstances, a situation referred to as the feminisation of poverty.
Under the previous regime the latter was complicated by a number of factors: influx control, rural out-migration, etc, and the unwillingness of the apartheid government to develop rural areas. When it came to water for rural areas, there were clear political interests that were safeguarded by water policies in which access was linked to land tenure. With about 85% of the population having no land rights, the implications were enormous. There was no food security for people in the rural areas because the irrigation schemes were a monopoly of the landowners.
After 1994 the political, social and economic climate changed to create the best conditions for the eradication of poverty. The passing of the Constitution in 1996 ensured that the rights that the Federation of South African Women had presented were secured, and access to potable water was one of those basic rights.
The Department of Water Affairs changed policies to ensure that water is not monopolised by a few. The so-called riparian rights, which give one rights of access to clean water by virtue of being a landowner, were changed to ensure that even if one were a landowner that right did not come automatically. Thus far, the department has delivered water to about seven million people, creating opportunities for other activities such as bricklaying, salons, etc, even for rural areas.
Today we can say that food security is guaranteed in the areas where there is clean potable water. In all these activities women have benefited. We need to reinforce the integrated approach to development, to ensure delivery of water so that it can have an impact on poverty. The free basic water policy has benefited women, especially those who fall within the poverty bracket in both urban and rural areas.
So far plus-minus 66% are benefiting from it. We commend the department for speeding up the process of water provision to the poor, although there is still a bigger challenge ahead. Realising the equality between men and women, the jobs that the department created were shared between them. Of the 3 397 jobs that have been created by the department plus-minus 50% are performed by women. There is still a great imbalance between men and women at management level as a result of the lack of skills amongst women. The department is consciously recruiting women for training to fill these gaps. There is clear evidence that the Government has succeeded in engendering a culture of human rights. We need to understand that this is a process which seeks to transform society, changing its patriarchal values and giving dignity to all regardless of gender. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Ms S C VOS: Chairperson, we celebrate Human Rights Day in our country to create an opportunity to ponder how much has been achieved and how much remains to be done. We all know that the protection of human rights is an evolving process. This celebration should indeed not be an empty ritual, and in order to be meaningful, we must focus on the challenges we face. If we merely rise today to speak about past achievements we will have failed to bring forward the eternal quest for human rights protection. We need to consider today’s and tomorrow’s issues rather than merely rest on yesterday’s accolades.
What has been achieved through our struggle for liberation and the establishment of our democracy, and through hundreds of legislative reforms that we have passed in this House, is indeed a monumental achievement with obviously no comparison in our history and with few in mankind’s history.
However, we could make no greater mistake than believing that the job is finished or that what we have achieved is safe from being threatened. The truth is that much needs to be done and human rights are now as much in jeopardy as they were, regrettably, before. The gap between legality and reality is still very wide. To the majority of our people the declarations of rights contained in our Constitution have little significance. Women and children continue to be abused daily in our society. Thousands every year are murdered. Millions live in fear of their fellow citizens. They ask, every day: Will I be robbed? Will I be raped? Private security industries are booming throughout our country.
So, we have to recognise, as we all do, that the most fundamental right of them all is for a dignified life free from need and fear. This right can only be fulfilled by getting our country into a much higher gear of economic growth, because we all know, too, that poverty is an enemy of democracy. We need to create economic prosperity and social stability in our communities. We all know that, especially amongst the poorest of the poor. We are doing a lot and yet it does not seem sufficient when compared to the oceans of needs confronting us.
It is remarkable that the Global Competitiveness Report, published by the World Economic Forum, indicates that in terms of proportional finance transfers from the rich to the poor we come first among the countries surveyed. We can take pride in this. However, without further economic growth and employment generation, real human rights protection will remain an empty promise as far as the majority of South Africans are concerned.
We must also accept that as human rights are in constant jeopardy, we are the very people who may threaten them. Our laws and the actions of our Government are the primary potential sources of human rights violations. We need to permeate our actions with a culture of vigilance that questions the way we act at all times.
We use power to improve the lives of people but we must never believe that anyone is beyond the possibility of abusing power. Whenever power has been abused it has always been done for reasons which appeared or were portrayed as good reasons. We only need to reflect on Mr Robert Mugabe’s actions in Zimbabwe in this regard.
In this respect I wish to point out how my leader, Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, the Minister of Home Affairs, became aware of the possibility that one of the most important reforms of this Government could give rise to an abuse of power. When launching the Hanis project, Minister Buthelezi, unprompted and unsolicited by anyone, realised that such a powerful collection of data and personal information could give rise to abuses and possible violations of the right to privacy, and he took the initiative to request Prof Fink Haysom to suggest to him guidelines or possible legislation to ensure that under no condition could Hanis offer the opportunity of turning the positive aspects of social organisation into abuses. [Interjections.] He did it.
We need to focus clearly on the relationship between the abuse of power and the economic decline of a society. Throughout history, whenever power is abused, a civilisation begins to decline. In our context, it is absolutely essential that we commit ourselves to never forgetting that prosperity and democracy are inseparable. Whenever power begins to be abused, prosperity declines. We cannot use double standards. Freedom and democracy are freedom and democracy, and if we deserve them, everybody else has an equal right to them. If we begin closing an eye to violations of freedom and to attacks on democracy in other countries, especially when they are so close to us, then our own democracy is in truth weak and in jeopardy. We can say that we are trying. But are we achieving? That indeed is the million-rand question. [Applause.]
Mr D M BAKKER: Chairperson, tomorrow South Africa will celebrate Human Rights Day. In this regard it is very important for Parliament to reflect on our achievements in establishing a culture of human rights in our country. Hopefully, this debate will also assist in advancing the cause of human rights in our own country and on our continent.
Before the adoption of our interim Constitution, the basic constitutional features of our legal framework were parliamentary sovereignty and the exclusion of the majority of South Africans from representation in organs of state. British colonisation of Southern Africa since the beginning of the 19th century established the principle that Parliament could do everything that is not naturally impossible in our country.
Parliamentary sovereignty was the constitutional instrument that enabled a minority to introduce and refine the apartheid system. Any attempts to assert the right of judicial review were unsuccessful.
Baie Suid-Afrikaners, en ook baie agb lede van hierdie Huis, is op grond van ras geklassifiseer. Na aanleiding hiervan is hulle onderdruk en aan verskillende gewelddadige dade blootgestel. Onder die dekmantel van sogenaamde staatsveiligheid is gruweldade gepleeg waarop geen regdenkende Suid-Afrikaner trots kan wees nie. Dit is seker onmoontlik vir iemand wat dit nie self ervaar het, en wie se menswaardigheid nie totaal daardeur afgebreek is nie, om ooit werklik te begryp waarvan gepraat word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Many South Africans, as well as many hon members of this House, were classified according to race. As a result they were oppressed and subjected to various acts of violence. Under the cloak of so-called state security, atrocities were committed that no right-minded South African can be proud of. It is probably impossible for someone who did not experience this him or herself, and whose human dignity was not completely broken down by this, to ever truly comprehend what is being talked about.]
Against this background, we have started the process of healing and eliminating the divisions of our past. The overwhelming majority of South Africans, across the racial and political divide, opted for a new constitutional order, premised on an open and democratic government and the universal enjoyment of fundamental rights.
Today we have an outstanding Constitution, including a Bill of Human Rights, which every South African can be proud of.
Our Constitution is based on values that underlie an open and democratic society and the concept of ubuntu. This concept was described by Justice Langa as follows, and I quote:
It recognises a person’s status as a human being, entitled to unconditional respect, dignity, value and acceptance from members of the community that such a person happens to be part of.
Die daarstelling van ‘n menseregtekultuur in Suid-Afrika het werklik beslag gekry met die aanvaarding van ons Grondwet en die instelling van die Konstitusionele Hof. Met inagneming van buitelandse reg, die volkereg en die waardes wat ‘n oop en demokratiese samelewing bevorder, het ons howe inhoud begin gee aan die regte wat in die Grondwet gewaarborg word.
Die uitsprake van ons Konstitusionele Hof en ander howe maak dit duidelik dat ‘n individu nooit gereduseer mag word tot ‘n blote objek waaroor mag uitgeoefen word nie. Menswaardigheid moet gerespekteer word, en die staat mag slegs in die lewe van die individu inmeng as dit noodsaaklik is vir die handhawing van ‘n ordelike samelewing. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The establishment of a human rights culture in South Africa was truly settled with the adoption of our Constitution and the establishment of the Constitutional Court. In consideration of foreign law, international law and the values that promote an open and democratic society, our courts have begun to give content to the rights guaranteed in the Constitution.
The verdicts of our Constitutional Court and other courts indicate clearly that an individual may never be reduced to a mere object over which power is exerted. Human dignity must be respected, and the state may only intervene in the life of the individual if this is necessary for the maintenance of an orderly society.]
In a short period of time since 1994 we have made substantial progress in developing a truly South African jurisprudence. We can be proud of our achievements, but we cannot afford to forget our past. The link between our history concerning human rights abuses and the adoption of the Constitution should always be uppermost in our minds. It is the responsibility of all South Africans to acknowledge and to nurture the culture of human rights.
In this regard, the attitude of politicians and their guidance will be decisive in the advancement of a human rights culture. Our actions, our efforts and our support should never undermine our proclaimed commitment to upholding human rights. If the people of Zimbabwe are intimidated, repressed and victimised by agents of their own government, it is our duty as neighbours and as fellow men and women to do everything in our power to assist in the restoration of human dignity in Zimbabwe. We cannot allow any individual to blatantly disregard that dignity.
In conclusion, let us acknowledge our achievements since 1994. Let us build on our successes as a country where democratic ideals are not merely words on paper. Our advancement in the cause of human rights will, in years to come, determine whether we have succeeded in entrenching real human dignity for all South Africans. [Applause.]
Rev A D GOOSEN: Chairperson, I will be concentrating on matters pertaining to local government. It is significant that this debate is taking place on the eve of Human Rights Day, because this is the ideal time for taking stock of what we have achieved in terms of the Bill of Rights.
In Genesis we read that, Man has been created in the image and likeness
of God'' and in Genesis there is a strong emphasis on the dignity of man.
This notion is echoed in section 10 of the Bill of Rights which states that
Everyone has inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity
respected and protected.’’
Our past history reveals that the dignity of one section of society was trampled upon by the infringement of their human rights. This is clear from the conditions under which people had to live. A peek into our history will reveal that people were subjected to terrible hardships in their areas of residence.
The urban poor are living on the periphery, which in many instances is no less than three kilometres out of town. In these areas all the roads were corrugated. There was a gross lack of services such as water. People had to queue for water at a communal tap. The bucket system was used and this was largely degrading to people. The streets were all untarred and muddy when it rained. The townships were pitch dark at night, and, because of the lack of electricity, women had to walk long distances every day in order to gather wood to keep the home fires burning.
Barring the lack of services, the nonexistence of infrastructure was evidenced by the absence of a stormwater system, proper housing, clinics, crèches, community halls, sports fields, hospitals and shopping complexes. The lack of all these facilities constitutes a serious violation of the rights of people, because these rights were withheld on purpose.
The picture changed dramatically with the heralding in of the new dispensation when the ANC was elected into Government in 1994. With the assistance of both the provincial and local government spheres, central Government systematically set about addressing the urgent needs of the people throughout the country, so as to bring about relief and to change their lives for better. Those of us who worked in these areas could actually see the changes which were being brought about.
The transformation which took place was most heartening. A person could see that gradually the face of the townships was changing dramatically with the improvement of the infrastructure. Allow me to expand on how we sought to eradicate at least some of these difficulties which people had to experience on a daily basis. Previously people were living in darkness. Their lives were literally lit up by the electrification of their residential areas. Can members imagine what it means for people who had to walk to church by means of candlelight now, all of a sudden, to have lights on the streets? Can members imagine what it means for people who had to walk three kilometres to town to make a telephone call, or for those who are living in rural areas, kilometres apart, to get telephones and now to be in close contact with their families and friends?
In many instances the bucket system has been replaced by a decent sewerage system. This has gone a long way in restoring the dignity of residents in the townships. Where previously patients had to walk long distances to get to a clinic, we now have a situation where clinics have been erected in most of these residential areas.
When water was brought onto their premises, people were most appreciative of having access to this much-sought-after commodity. Access roads to our townships have been tarred and people are also appreciative of this.
Through the initiative of Government, houses were built, community halls were erected, crèches came into being, sports fields were built and people were given access to land. Thanks to the communal property associations, people and communities can now access land. One such trust exists in my constituency, the Illima Properties Association. These people are doing well. A further 26 hectares of land were handed over to the community on 17 December 2001.
These achievements are shining examples of what Government has done in a short space of time. Those who see these attainments as insignificant are those who reside in the leafy suburbs of town and who never knew what it meant to be deprived of the essential things in life. Besides, they are the ones who can never begin to imagine the hardships that people have had to face all their lives.
These changes are especially of great value to our womenfolk. It restored their dignity because no person should be of less value than another. Instead of carrying a bundle of wood on the head, the ladies can now switch the stove on to cook a decent meal for their loved ones. Instead of lighting a candle, a woman can switch on the light. She has more time for a host of other things and can even take time to further her education. The ANC Government has gone a long way in the emancipation of women.
Whereas local government was previously limited to the towns and cities, we now have a wall-to-wall government system which gives people the right to decide their own future, and to mandate their Government.
For struggling people, especially women in rural areas, this is indeed great progress, because the entire country is now covered by local government systems which need to be implemented by the central Government. [Time Expired.] [Applause.]
Mr S ABRAM: Madam Speaker, the pre-1994 period is laden with a tragic and long history of numerous incidents of state-sanctioned gross human rights violations. The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty led to systematic violations of the rule of law and gross state-sanctioned human rights violations. Therefore, on the eve of Human Rights Day, we need to reflect on our country’s achievements and shortcomings.
Whilst we have made many strides in a variety of fields, we have still not been able to fully restore the rights of our women, our children and, to a degree, our disabled. We cannot, as men, claim to be liberated unless the human rights of our women, children and disabled are restored.
At the child abuse hearings last week, horror tales unfolded when our children spoke out. The possibilities have been documented and we need now to map out the way forward. Laws alone are not the solution. We need to change the psyche of our society and develop a caring culture where the protectors remain exactly that and do not turn into the perpetrators, who must be ostracised and isolated.
Whilst we celebrate steady progress in human rights, we are saddened by the rapid erosion thereof in other parts of the world, for example the Middle East, the United States and, even closer to home, Zimbabwe. I wish to address these unambiguously and without fear. The United States, that bastion of democracy, the big brother policing other nations on human rights issues, in its foray into Afghanistan, burnt the proverbial haystack, but never found the needle, destroying the country’s infrastructure, rendering thousands homeless and robbing thousands more of their dreams, aspirations and human rights by killing indiscriminately.
Captured fighters are currently incarcerated at Guantánamo Bay under the most abhorrent conditions imaginable. In the aftermath of 11 September, an abhorrent event where civilians were robbed of their right to life, anyone resembling an Arab in the United States was discriminated against, and hundreds are still incarcerated in prisons, reminiscent of the 180-days detentions during the heyday of apartheid. The United States constitution reads and I quote: ``Every citizen is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’’ You be the judge! Are those incarcerated enjoying any of that?
In the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has intensified, and again thousands have been robbed of their dreams and human rights. The Economist of 2 February 2002 reports as follows, and I quote:
The Bush administration has pounded vigorously on Mr Arafat, Vice President Dick Cheney all but calling him a liar. But the Americans are not dealing with Mr Arafat. They are letting Israel bleed him until he aggressively roots out the infrastructure of the terrorist organisation in Palestine and arrests those known to plan or support such acts.
I conclude by saying: Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. [Time expired.]
Mr S N SWART: Madam Speaker, there is no doubt that huge strides have been made in South Africa generally, and in our human rights culture particularly, when it comes to the removal of racial and gender discrimination. At the same time, however, when one considers various reports that have been tabled in Parliament, one realises that much still has to be done to promote God-given human rights, particularly when it comes to abused women and children. Yesterday’s debate on the interim report on the sexual abuse of children has highlighted a dismal record in the protection of children.
In so far as offences against women and children are concerned, we need to continually emphasise a victim-centred approach to criminal justice. Only by exposing the trauma experienced by victims of crime, as was done this week, can we begin to understand the extent of this violation of human rights. Clearly, we are far from cultivating a human rights culture in this regard. We need to cry out to God in confession and repentance for failing our abused women and children.
Whilst the ACDP applauds the attention given to the plight of such abused women and children, this phenomenon is a symptom of a much deeper malaise in our society. We speak about the need for moral regeneration in our society, but we are basically reaping what we have sown. As God does exist and does create law, any society that ignores His laws does so at its own peril.
Without a culture of God-given human rights and biblically-based laws that are worthy of obedience, no amount of moral regeneration can take place, as there is no frame of reference at the outset. Man quickly realises that if he accepts that God does not exist or that God’s law can be ignored, all things become permissible and one is faced with situational ethics.
Whilst legal positivists have no criterion for judging the appropriateness of a law other than man’s perceived needs, the Christian can and must refer to the divine law as his basis for declaring a law just or unjust, and for engendering a culture of God-given human rights.
Ms O R KASIENYANE: Madam Speaker and hon members, the best of our political dispensation brought with it the hope for the poorest of the poor. Built into that was the hope that their human rights as human beings would be restored.
Today we can look back and proudly say that we have not reached the promised land, but we are at the mountain top, from where we can clearly see our promised land. These are some of the sentiments which I have come across while visiting some of our rural areas.
It is true that, for the first time, no African child has to suffer from malnutrition or lose his or her life at a tender age because his or her parents are unemployed, thanks to the policy of our Government to provide grants in such circumstances. It is true that the grants might not meet all the expectations, but to our people it is like manna from heaven, because they know that Rome was not built in one day.
Nothing is more heart-rending than when one is old and feels that one has no rights because no one seems to care for one. The rights of the aged, as espoused by our policies, have given hope to our senior citizens. They can now walk tall and, like our former President said, they can soon even die with a smile on their faces because this ANC-led Government has proven to them that their rights will be protected at all costs.
Historically, services to older persons were rendered mainly in urban areas to a minority, and generally consisted of institutional care. As in other parts of the world, the management of aging in South Africa is of importance to the Government. Of particular concern is the lack of appropriate and affordable services for frail, destitute older persons in disadvantaged and rural communities.
To address these issues, a new dispensation has been introduced. It incorporates an appropriate and affordable community-based service with the family as the core support system; the principle that older people should live at home or in communities for as long as possible; the promotion of an age-integrated society where older people are regarded as full and equal citizens; and the viewpoint that older people are a valuable pool of knowledge, expertise, skills and wisdom.
From its formation, the ANC has always been a movement for the liberation of all the people of Africa, including South Africa. It has always seen itself as fighting for the human dignity of all Africans. Loyal to this human rights and patriotic tradition, the ANC is convinced that the time has come for Africa to take its rightful place among the world’s nations in pursuit of human rights for African men, women and children. Afrika, ke nako. [Africa, now is the time.] [Applause.]
In November 1998, the Government’s economic, social and justice sectors committed themselves to SADC’s declaration on the prevention of violence against women and children, signed in Mauritius in September. The commitment was made at a national conference held in Pretoria to mark the beginning of a series of actions aimed at redressing violence against women and children and popularising the declaration.
These actions culminated in the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights held in Johannesburg on 10 December. On this day the Government launched its national action plan on human rights.
These milestones achieved for African children are, however, not without birth pangs, for the violation of these rights under the previous regime for more than 300 years had already polarised our society. Hence the abuse of these rights by children who undermine their parents and the feeling of despair and helplessness among parents who do not understand the implications of such rights for them and their children. Our main task as a country is therefore to educate the masses and ensure that what we struggled for for so long was not pursued in vain. The question is: Is the Human Rights Commission well equipped and capacitated to fulfil this mammoth task?
The status of rural women married under customary laws has recently changed. Previously only civil and Christian marriages were accepted as legitimate. We are proud today that the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act is in place. The Constitution of our country is unique in its specific provisions for gender equality, affirmative action, freedom and security of person and socioeconomic rights and in the provision that customary law is subject to the Bill of Rights.
There are many cases of hidden discrimination. These form critical barriers to the achievement of substantive equality. For example, while men and women are, in theory, equally eligible for government housing and land schemes, men are still the major beneficiaries because such schemes are registered in their names.
Violence against women and children is the most pervasive and serious violation of human rights in the world today. That is why we are here today, committed to working actively to put an end to it. Let us keep the spirit of sacrifice and dedication. Let us concretise the notion of volunteerism within ourselves. The human mind must be made aware that anyone who witnesses acts of violence must report them to the police. These women and children, victims of violation and harassment, need long periods of psychological therapy.
As members of Parliament, we can and must play a crucial role as a link between Government and civil society if the promotion of human rights, democratisation and good governance is to succeed.
We have been elected not to enrich ourselves, but to help the poor and marginalised in our society. In doing so, we can become truly rich. We can only be honourable by making ourselves honourable and dignified through democracy. As equal partners in development, we will contribute substantially to the realisation of these aims and objectives.
I am able and proud to tell the story of our country’s contribution to the evolution of earth, life, humanity and human society. This calls for a celebration of our rich history and heritage. Indeed, the values contained in the Freedon Charter should inspire all of us to cultivate a new patriotism based on a sense of community, respect for the dignity of every individual and a shared destiny.
I am a volunteer, and in order to ensure a better life for all South Africans, so can and should fellow hon members be. [Applause.]
Dr C P MULDER: Mev die Speaker, daar word groot gewag gemaak deur veral die ANC dat Suid-Afrika die beste en modernste grondwet in die wêreld het. Vroeër vanjaar het die agb Minister van Waterwese en Bosbou juis in hierdie Huis oor die onderwerp in vervoering geraak. Feit van die saak is egter: Daar is geen ding soos ‘n finale grondwet nie, en tweedens, die huidige Grondwet is nie die modernste en beste grondwet in die wêreld nie. Om die waarheid te sê, die Grondwet is in verskeie wesenlike aspekte fundamenteel gebrekkig. Alhoewel daar met die huidige Grondwet ‘n belangrike stap vorentoe gegee is met die daarstelling van ‘n Handves van Regte het die tyd nou aangebreek dat die volgende tree gegee word met die erkenning van minderheidsregte vir die verskillende gemeenskappe in Suid-Afrika as ‘n logiese uitbreiding van die huidige individuele regte. Die bekende filosoof Johann Roussouw skryf onlangs in Die Taalgenoot hieroor die volgende:
Die enigste konstante is verandering en daarom moet ons onsself voortdurend afvra: Wat is politiek in ‘n veranderende wêreld? Politiek is die gevolg van die ontmoeting tussen die verskillende belange van ons alledaagse leefwêreld, en omdat hierdie belange meervoudig is, is die politiek ‘n deurlopende poging om hierdie belange op ‘n skeppende wyse in ‘n ewewig te probeer bring. In homogene gemeenskappe is individuele regte voldoende om hierdie ewewig te verseker, maar in ‘n diverse gemeenskap soos Suid-Afrika is dit alleen ongelukkig nie voldoende nie. Minderheidsregte staan nie teenoor individuele menseregte nie, maar is juis ‘n logiese uitbreiding van individuele regte, veral in ‘n diverse en verdeelde samelewing soos wat ons in Suid-Afrika het. Die tyd het gekom dat ons hierdie logiese stap neem, dan en eers dan sal ons dalk daarvan kan begin praat dat ons die modernste grondwet in die wêreld het. Tot dan is dit nog lank nie daar nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, a great deal of reference is made by the ANC in particular to the fact that South Africa has the best and most modern constitution in the world. Earlier this year the hon the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry went into raptures in this House about precisely this subject. However, the fact of the matter is: There is no such thing as a final constitution, and secondly, the current Constitution is not the most modern and best constitution in the world. To tell the truth, the Constitution is fundamentally flawed in various essential aspects. Although an important step forward was taken with the current Constitution with the establishment of a Bill of Rights, the time has now come that the next step be taken with the recognition of minority rights for the various communities in South Africa as a logical extension of the current individual rights. The well-known philosopher Johann Roussouw recently wrote the following about this matter in Die Taalgenoot:
Die enigste konstante is verandering en daarom moet ons onsself voortdurend afvra: Wat is politiek in ‘n veranderende wêreld? Politiek is die gevolg van die ontmoeting tussen die verskillende belange van ons alledaagse leefwêreld, en omdat hierdie belange meervoudig is, is die politiek ‘n deurlopende poging om hierdie belange op ‘n skeppende wyse in ‘n ewewig te probeer bring.
In homogeneous communities individual rights are sufficient to ensure this balance, but in a diverse community like South Africa this on its own is unfortunately not sufficient. Minority rights are not in opposition to individual human rights, but are precisely a logical extension of individual rights, particularly in a diverse and divided society as we have in South Africa. The time has come for us to take this logical step; then and only then can we perhaps begin talking about having the most modern constitution in the world. Until then that is by far not the case.] Mr I S MFUNDISI: Madam Speaker, as a people of this part of the globe, we have to be thankful that we are heirs of a never-say-die and undaunting determination of the men and women who met at the World Trade Centre to negotiate a settlement for this country. It is the same negotiations which brought to light the fact that brains, not brawn, is what matters.
Those negotiations gave birth to the culture of human rights. Human rights are based on respect for dignity, and they are based on the philosophy of live and let live. Any conduct that involves committing murder, and engaging in violent activities and the abuse of children, is inconsistent with respect for human rights.
Through Acts of Parliament, the Government has shown resolve in inculcating a culture of human rights. The abolition of capital punishment has been one way of demonstrating this resolve. The equality of all people as contained in section 9 of the Constitution is non-negotiable. It is clear that no one may be unfairly discriminated against on grounds of race, colour, ethnic or social origin, sex, religion or language.
To this end, Parliament has passed the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act of 2000. However, the Act has unfortunately not been implemented and enforced in its entirety due to a lack of human and financial resources. One wonders, why go to such lengths and then leave the Act to gather dust? It is surely an indication of poor planning that will result in failure.
We should also be at pains to inculcate a spirit of self-worth among our people. Each person has to know that they were not created with the crumbs of soil that fell from the Master’s table and clay as He made other people. We have to imbue our people with the knowledge that each one is somebody. We call on all people to direct their energies to the foundational values of our Constitution, namely the rule of law, dignity, equality and freedom, which are the bedrock on which to build the future.
The Chapter 9 institutions in our Constitution have been put in place to serve as checks and balances for the man in the street. They enjoy independence and may be accessed without any bureaucratic constraints.
Finally, may we plead that all measures meant to enhance human rights be enforced. We should not have a situation like the one in which the Commissioner of Police is on record as having said that the Domestic Violence Act is unenforceable. It is unfortunate that we have such situations.
Mong S PHOHLELA: Mohlomphehi Modulaqhowa, beng ba ka ka hare ho ntlo e kgabane. Maobane ha ho ngangisanwa ka raporoto ya Rasephadi wa ntlo ena, ka taba tsa Zimbabwe ke ile ka utlwa ke futhumala ka fumana maikutlo a ka a ferekana. Ha ke hopola hore dingangele tseo tsa maobane tseo ke batho bao e leng hore malapa a bona ha a eso hlekwe ka hare ho naha ka mona. Ke rata hore ha ke kena tabeng ena ya ditokelo tsa botho ke tle ke totobale kere … (Translation of Sotho paragraph follows.)
[Mr S PHOHLELA: Honourable Chairperson and everybody in this honourable House, yesterday during the debate concerning the report presented by the Whip of this House, regarding the issue of Zimbabwe, I felt very much perturbed when I recalled that those rebels are people whose domestic affairs are still bound to be placed in order here in the country.]
I will dedicate this speech to those farm labourers who still experience the hardships of life on this land.
Ke na le lengolo mona mme ke rata hore ke hle ke qale ka ho qotsa. Le re ``Ntate re hlekefeditswe nako e telele, re se re tshaba le koloi e fetang ka tsela, haholo bosiu. Lekgowa le neng le tlile le ngaka ke Tjhuki ya sebetsang le John Vosloo. Taba e ntse e le ditaba tsa Auto, ntate, eo ya nkileng makgomo a rona a mashome a mabedi a metso e mehlano, a a kwalla sebakeng seo ho thweng ke Senekal, moo di nyametseng teng haesale di kwallwa ka selemo sa 2000.’’ Le hona jwale batho bao makgomo a bona ha a so kgutle.
E ne e le ka 1997 ha ke eme mona, ke hlalosa ka botebo mathata ao batho ba rona mapolasing ba a fumanang. Ke hlalosa ka mokgwa oo mangangajane ana a maqaqa ao e leng hore a ikemeseditse hore melao yohle e etswang ke ntlo ena bona ba tla e beela ka thoko ba nne ba tswele pele ka tsela eo bona ba ileng ba rutwa ka teng hore motho e motsho o tshwanetse a tshwarwe ka teng, ba ntse ba le teng ka hare ho naha ena. Ha re bua ka ditokelo tsa botho re tshwanetse re itekoleng pele ka hare ho lapa lena pele re ka ahlola ba bang ba kang batho ba Zimbabwe.
Ntho e teng e sehloho eo re so kang re teba ho yona, ke taba ya hore hlekefetso ya moya, spiritual violence, ha re so ka re kena ka botebo ho yona. Re shebile physical violence, e leng hlekefetso ya nama, ke yona ntho eo re e shebileng. Empa ntho e sehloho eo e leng mohlodi wa hlekefetso ya nama, ke spiritual violence. Batho ba rona ba dutse e le hore ba tlatlapuwa, ba dutse ba amohuwa, ba dutse e le hore ba a tejelwa mapolasing, ba hlekefetswa ka tsela tsohle, ba kwallwa metsi, ba kwallwa ditsela, bana ba sitiswa ho ya dikolong mapolasing. Mme he, ke re ka hona, ha re so ka be re fihlella ka botebo hore re ke re lekole hore na, re kgotsofetse hore ditokelo tsa botho, di a phethahatswa ka hare ho naha ena.
Ke bona bana bao e leng hore re ba bitsa maburu a naha ena, ha ke re kaofeela, ba teng, nna ke bua le bomphato ba Foreisetata. Ke bua ka tulo yane e pela Poloru pela Senekal pela Bethlehem. Ha se jwale ke bua ka batho bao ba dulang mapolasing ao hore ba hlekefeditswe. Re ba bolelletse hore ba dule, re ile ra ba ra ya, ra ikopanya le bona boramapolasi bao, ba re bolelletse dihaeya ditaba di hana ho feela. Batho bao ke dikoeyoko tse hlapaolang batho ha bohloko tse sa tshabeng le ho hlapaola boetapele ba puso ena ya Aforikaborwa. Ba re jwetsitse mahlong, ke tsamaya le batho ba neng ba tswa lefapheng la tsa temo, mmusong wa Foreisetata hore, ha ba kgathalle hore se etsuwang ke mmuso ona ke sefe, naha ena ke ya bo bona. Mme le kajeno, ho ntse ho tswelwa pele, mangolo ana ao ke a balang mona ke mangolo ao ke a balang a fihla ka Mantaha, ka hore ke a kopile ke batla ho tseba hore na ho ntse ho etsahalang.
Ke rata ho qholotsa ntlo ena, Mmako , ke rata ho o qholotsa, hore jwaloka ha o ile wa ntsha komishene e ilo hlahloba le ho lekola Zimbabwe, le rona ka hare ho naha ka mona, o ke o bope komiti ya mekga e mengata e tla tsamayang le rona ba bang, re ke re ye mapolasing ba ke ba yo ikutlwela ba botse batho ba bo bona hore hobaneng ha batho ba habo rona ba dutse ba hlekefetswa habohloko ha kana.[Applause.] [Mahofi.] (Translation of Sotho paragraphs follows.)
[Getting to the human rights issue, I would like to put it clearly by quoting. You say: ``We have been abused for a very long time, so much so that we get even frightened on hearing a car passing by in the street, especially at night. The white person who came along with the doctor is called Tjhuki and he is John Vosloo’s colleague who snatched twenty-five of our cattle and who has corralled them since the year 2000 at a placed called Senekal, from where they have since disappeared.’’ Even today, those people have not yet received back their cattle.
It was in 1997 that I stood here, thoroughly explaining the troubles which our people on the farms are going through - explaining the manner in which these poor, cold-blooded people are determined to ignore all the laws that are being implemented by this House, and to pursue the way in which they were taught regarding the manner in which a black person should be treated. Such people are still here and are living in this country. Before we can start accusing countries such as Zimbabwe, whenever we talk about human rights, we first need to assess and analyse our own domestic affairs.
There is a very critical factor with which we have not yet dealt in depth. That is spiritual harassment. We have not yet dealt in depth with this factor. We are concentrating on physical violence, which concerns bodily harm. That is what we are concentrating on. But the cruel thing which is the actual source of physical harassment is spiritual violence. Our people are constantly being harassed, stripped of their possessions and kicked off the farms. They are being harassed in every possible manner. They are being denied access to water supply, they are being denied access to roadways and children are being hindered from attending schools. Therefore, I would like to point out that we have not yet reached the stage at which we can confidently claim that we are satisfied as regards the implementation of human rights in this country.
It is the same people whom we call boers in this country. But I don’t mean all of them. I am talking about my colleagues in the Free State. I am talking about that place near Paul Roux, Senekal and Bethlehem. It has been a long time now since I have talked about those people who are living on the farms having been brutally harassed. We told them to remain there and we went and met those farmers, who told us a whole lot of evil things. Those people are really evil individuals who brutally swear at people. They are not even afraid to swear at the government leaders of this country. They told us without any fear - me and my delegates from the department of agriculture in the Free State Province - that they don’t care about what the government is busy doing, and that it is their country. Even today, the process is still continuing. These letters that I am reading here arrived here on Monday. I asked for them because I wanted to be up to date as to what is currently happening.
I would like to challenge this House. Your honour, I want to challenge you, that just as you instituted a commission that went to assess the situation in Zimbabwe, we also need a multiparty commission which will accompany us to the farms so that they can hear for themselves by asking those people questions as to why our people are being so brutally harassed. [Applause.]]
Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Speaker, the PAC calls 21 March Sharpeville Day, the United Nations declared it the international day for the elimination of racial discrimination, and in this country it is called Human Rights Day. There would be no 21 March in the history of the world and of this country, observed by the United Nations and South Africa, if the brave sons and daughters of our country never heeded the PAC’s call that inhuman pass laws must go.
When launching the positive action campaign against the pass laws the founding president of the PAC, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, said:
I need not list the arguments against the pass laws. Their effects are well known. All the evidence of broken homes, the oppression and degradation of the African, lead to one conclusion, that the pass laws must go. We cannot remain foreigners in our country. If the African people are asked to disperse, they will do so orderly and quietly. They have instructions from me to do so, but we will not run away. If the other side so desires, we will provide them with an opportunity to demonstrate to the world how brutal they can be. We are ready to die for our cause, we are not yet ready to kill for it.
The historic revolutionary action by the PAC on 21 March 1960 internationalised the vile system of apartheid. For the first time ever the Security Council, the supreme body of the United Nations, discussed South Africa in the anticolonial context. The Broederbond, the think-tank of apartheid, was shaken to its foundation. Afrikaners such as the Rev Beyers Naudé resigned from the Broederbond.
When commemorating 21 March, the historic role of the PAC on that day and the African martyrs who fell in Sharpeville and Langa must be truthfully recorded. Through the historic campaign the PAC contributed many conventions to international law, the most important of which was the international Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Miss S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, it is certain that the introduction of the Bill of Rights, and the recognition of the institution of human rights and equality, were hard for many to adjust to. But the MF congratulates all South Africans on the unanimous turnaround from a racially divided citizenry to a people’s society, where all are free, fair and equal.
It is just a few years since our first democratic election, in comparison to years of inhuman oppression, but look at us now! Together in one House, working in unison for the betterment of all South Africans!
We have crossed the social divide. The MF applauds all parties who have shown an untainted commitment to making this democracy work. The reason for upholding human rights is not just that the Constitution reigns supreme and the law demands that it should be upheld, but rather because we are a people’s government. We are also the people, and human rights are the central issue that makes us a people’s government.
The many projects and initiatives and the variety of contributors to programmes concerning human rights, even the task team on the abuse of children, are examples of that culture of human rights that has built us into the nation we are today: the rainbow nation, with a people’s government that works hard at protecting, enhancing and promoting human rights in all our work. The MF is proud to be part of this culture for human rights. [Applause.]
Mr C AUCAMP: Madam Speaker, may I bring something to the attention of this House and of the HRC? It is this booklet from the HRC called My Rights, Your Rights. The very first chapter, the Bill of Rights, starts with a picture that I wish to show to the House. A man is standing on a mountain holding two stone tablets, rays of sunlight shining upon him. Clearly this resembles Moses on Mount Sinai holding the two tablets of the Ten Commandments of God in his hands. We cannot accept this. The intrinsic message is that our Bill of Rights is the new, real Ten Commandments and replaces the proclaimed will of God. This is blasphemous.
The AEB is going to take this up with the HRC. Let us hope that they react positively, otherwise they will have to handle a complaint against themselves.
On paper South Africa has nearly everything in place with regard to individual human rights: the Bill of Rights entrenched in the Constitution, the Human Rights Commission and the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act.
Ek wil egter in die minuut wat ek oor het, net twee sake noem wat die regte van Suid-Afrikaners bedreig. Net gisteraand ontvang ek van ‘n dosent met ‘n doktorsgraad ‘n e-pos met die volgende woorde:
Ek verwag binnekort my afdanking, wanneer UniQwa by die UVS geïnkorporeer word. Emigrasie en toekomsloosheid vul my onderbewuste elke dag. Ek is 45 en ‘n WHAM - White Afrikaner Male. Al die wonderlike gepraat beteken niks. Sonder inkomste kan ek niks doen nie. My gesin sien geen sin in betrokkenheid by landsake nie as ek nie eens die lewensmiddele vir hulle kan voorsien nie.
Regstellende aksie is wel deel van die Handves, maar daar moet vandag besluit word of my briefskrywer opgewonde kan voel oor menseregte in Suid- Afrika. Ek kan die voorbeeld met duisende vermenigvuldig.
Die tweede saak is misdaad. In teorie het ek die reg tot vryheid van
beweging en in praktyk is ons strate na sononder ‘n no-go area''. In
teorie het ek die reg op lewe en in die praktyk is een uit elke 40 boere in
Suid-Afrika die afgelope tien jaar vermoor. Kom ons spreek misdaad en
onregstellende aksie aan. Dan praat ons weer van human rights’’. [Tyd
verstreke.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[However, in the minute left to me I want to mention two issues that are threatening the rights of South Africans. Just yesterday evening I received an E-mail from a lecturer with a doctor’s degree, which read:
Ek verwag binnekort my afdanking, wanneer UniQwa by die UVS geïnkorporeer word. Emigrasie en toekomsloosheid vul my onderbewuste elke dag. Ek is 45 en ‘n WHAM - White Afrikaner Male. Al die wonderlike gepraat beteken niks. Sonder inkomste kan ek niks doen nie. My gesin sien geen sin in betrokkenheid by landsake nie as ek nie eens die lewensmiddele vir hulle kan voorsien nie.
Affirmative action may form part of the Bill, but a decision must be taken today on whether my correspondent should be excited about human rights in South Africa. I can multiply this example by thousands.
The second issue is crime. In theory I have the right to freedom of movement, and in practice our streets are no-go areas after sundown. In theory I have the right to life, and in practice one out of very 40 farmers in South Africa was murdered over the past ten years. Let us address crime and ``onregstellende aksie’’ [un-affirmative action]. Then we can talk about human rights again. [Time expired.]]
The SPEAKER: I will also have to look at that book. I am not sure it is not also sexist. [Interjections.]
Mr L P M NZIMANDE: Madam Speaker, one is tempted to respond to The hon Dene Smuts, but we have to continue with the business at hand. [Interjections.] We are participating in this parliamentary debate today, during Human Rights Month, in order to make a contribution to the celebrations and commemorations of the national Human Rights Day. As a people we must indeed note the achievements we have made thus far in engendering a culture of human rights in all of the societal spheres, but not with complacency or a failure to acknowledge the gaps and weaknesses in our efforts to promote human rights.
As a nation we rise to build a South Africa that is radically different from the one that emerged a century ago: a nation that was ravaged with racial divisions systematically codified, sanctified and, indeed, ruthlessly implemented.
The system of apartheid carried with it social injustices which impoverished the majority of the citizens, engendering a patriarchal system that sexually discriminated against and dominated women citizens, and produced state institutions that did not care for the human rights and dignity of our people, to mention but a few of the ills that plagued people and continue to haunt us today in our endeavours to ensure that the culture of human rights is inculcated amongst ourselves as human beings and, indeed, within the institutions that we use as instruments for achieving our goals of a society that is free from racism, sexism and discrimination, a society that cares.
In the centre of all is the ill of the marginalisation of the vulnerable groups, namely, children, youth, the disabled and the elderly. A society’s generosity in its response to the needs of those in it who are vulnerable is central to the delivery of a better life.
Therefore the society must have yardsticks through which it measures itself by its responses to those needs. A call was made on the people by the President to rise and act in the spirit of volunteerism, ensuring that there is social equity for all and, I quote, ``that we accelerate and entrench the forward march of women’s emancipation in all spheres of our lives’’
We also need to reflect as a nation on whether we are indeed making the necessary progress in advancing the constitutional rights of disabled people. As we are heeding the call of Vukuzenzele we must guard against those in our society that would selfishly create barriers against the majority accessing opportunities that are created by our democracy and would even stand in the way of the enjoyment and realisation of human rights by all.
The ushering in of the new democracy in 1994 and the struggles that led to the current dispensation brought with them expectations of an enjoyment of human rights that are central to service delivery and the needs of our people. This poses a challenge to us regarding our goals of service delivery, to guarantee the accelerated speed which our programmes need to meet their objectives and increase access to those who still do not have.
In the middle of all efforts seeking solutions to the questions of service delivery, namely inaccessibility and the slow pace, are notably the milestones made in the progress of our human rights entrenchment strategies with guarantees accompanying them. Let me highlight a few. These include, amongst many, the freedoms of security, opinion, speech, expression, language, culture, assembly, movement and political activity. An individual has the right to choose freely his or her place of residence and to be treated and protected equally by law.
There is the right to life, to respect for and the promotion of one’s dignity, to have judicial disputes settled by a court, to have access to all information held by the state in order to exercise one’s rights, to a healthy environment, to a basic education and to be taught, where possible, in one’s own language.
Indeed, the choice is that of the people and those who lead them. We further note those instruments that are put in place to guard against violations, and the legislation programme that further assists in crafting a democracy that cares for its people, through the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, the draft Bill on sexual offences and the Bill on child justice, to name but a few that the House is aware of. There is also the youth development policy, that has been approved by Cabinet.
For marginalised groups the realisation of human rights is the foundation for the full attainment and enjoyment of their rights. The institutional infrastructure to roll out programmes for the youth, children and disabled people needs to continue to ensure that there is proper co-ordination that seeks to enhance delivery to them. Thus we welcome the national youth development policy, attempts to deal with widespread child abuse and the announcement by the Minister of Social Development yesterday of a plan to establish a review of services to children with disabilities in the rural areas.
Furthermore, we acknowledge and welcome the President’s pronouncements on the need for Government to allocate the necessary resources in the current medium-expenditure period, ensuring that Public Works speeds up the provision of resources for massive renovation programmes and projects in our schools, clinics, hospitals and other amenities across the country. This mission should be based on the values of the Constitution and the Government’s policies on reconstruction and development.
Democracy and equality should be the cornerstone of the values we seek to espouse. For disabled people, justice will be attained when there is reasonable access to existing infrastructure, as contemplated in the promotion of equality legislation of 2002. They require devices from the public health system and development work on sign language. Indeed, for the youth skills development strategies are currently in place. We also welcome the fact that the board of the Umsobomvu Fund has placed adverts for youth organisations to apply for at least R150 million to start to alleviate the plight that our youth is facing out there. These adverts invite previously disadvantaged youth to apply to the Umsobomvu Fund, in order to access resources to reach their full potential as citizens. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Madam Speaker, hon members, I speak on behalf of the Government, and that is why I have a speech written by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. But it is too late now to read the speech to hon members. I appear on behalf of the line-function Minister, the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development.
I arrived back from Amsterdam this afternoon at 13:00, and found that I was expected to close the debate on this very important day. It is a great pleasure to do so, although I feel I should be in bed by now, judging from what I went through yesterday.
We are in fact dealing with two matters here. We are not only dealing with the achievement of our country in developing and engendering the whole notion of a culture in human rights, but also, tomorrow we are commemorating the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, as we have been reminded by Mr Pheko, who is unfortunately not here at the moment. We fought very hard for the United Nations to put this on their agenda. I say this because a few days ago there were local government elections in Rotterdam, which I suppose is the second largest city in the Netherlands, and a chauvinist bigot became a member of the largest party. In the national elections that will be held in May, he may become the leader of the third largest party in the Netherlands. I have always considered the Netherlands to be a very humane and generous place, but in this month’s election campaign the codeword was one which one finds in most European countries, ``anti-immigration policy’’. An anti-immigration policy is basically a racist policy. There is no other way to describe it. The Dutch were ashamed that this could happen 60 years after the overthrowing of Nazism and their own occupation. They said they looked forward to South Africa giving a meaningful response to political leadership as to how they could deal with this situation and avert the possibility of chauvinists coming into important positions of power, running this extraordinary city and possibly coming into a coalition government.
I regret to say that Dene Smuts is not here. I will not say that I will not answer her, because I would like to answer what she said. I would ask her: Does she ever feel sometimes that she could be wrong? Does she not feel that by not giving the larger picture of what happened here, about our genuine achievements, she is actually selling South Africa short? A great friend of the opposition is a man called Kenny who writes for both the Citizen and the Spectator, a very influential right-wing journal. The last time he wrote he said: ``The position of the black in South Africa is worse than it was in the time of colonialism.’’
Anybody could write that. And, of course, the Spectator does not always answer replies, I regret to say. But anybody who could say that is not only selling our country short, but is really betraying the remarkable gains we have genuinely achieved. And that is dangerous for democracy! [Applause.] To mock democracy in this way plays into the hands of demagogues who want to rewrite history, as we heard about this.
The second point to remember is that we are trying to make our days as inclusive as possible. That is an important point - Mr Pheko is unfortunately not here - because on this day we also commemorate the extraordinary loss of women, black and white, in the concentration camps between 1899 and 1902. We heard for the first time about landlessness in that moving book by Sol Plaatje, A Native Life in South Africa. People had no sense of belonging! Millions of people became wanderers in their own country. The result was the total destruction of social organisation, because if one denies people a sense of belonging, one denies them a sense of nationality, and one denies them a basis for common citizenship, which is what in fact we have been trying to engender.
If Dene Smuts was here I would say that I spoke to the old DP - I sought special permission to go into their lunch room - about proportional representation. They did not know anything about proportional representation and single party lists in 1991 and 1992.
If we did not have this single party list, Mr Pheko would not come with his
revisions of history and a poem on rewriting history, as we find here
today. [Applause.] A poem on rewriting history! He would not be here. He is
from a 1% party. Most of the democrats would not be here either, because
everybody supported first past the posts. [Interjections.] I remember the
SABC asking poor Dada Sisulu when he came out of Robben Island, nogal,
What kind of electoral system would you like, Mr Sisulu?'' He had just
come out of Robben Island! And Mr Sisulu said, Well, you know,first past
the posts has served the whites very well, so it is good enough for us.’’
If we had first past the posts, which could have been imposed, it would have first of all entailed juggling with the constituencies. Secondly, the choice of candidates would not have resulted in women being candidates. That is the general history everywhere in the world of first past the posts. But the worst thing would have been an alliance between two parties, two parties who would have carved up the whole of South Africa. There would be no third and fourth parties and independents.
So we have someone here who got 50 000 votes, and he sits in Parliament. [Interjections.] Another who got 75 000 votes sits here. [Interjections.] The fact is that the electoral system, the top constitutional order, was proposed by us - the Constitutional Court - when we held a workshop.
Now I do not say these things out of any vainglory. But to say that in fact the Government … or, to use the words which Ms Vos should be ashamed of, that human rights are still in jeopardy as they were in the apartheid days, is to minimise what we have as a social compact. The important thing is that we arranged the social compact with each other. That was a fundamental triumph that no one can take away from us. [Interjections.] It was … Please! The hon member was not around then. We, the lawyers in the ANC, were asked in 1988 to draft a constitution for South Africa. We said that we could not draft a constitution for South Africa in the ANC, as a negotiating gambit. We said that this was the right of the people of South Africa to draft a constitution. [Applause.]
So we drafted the principles of the constitution, which became the basis of the Harare Declaration, and which became the basis of negotiation. And for the first time we drew not on the preamble to the Freedom Charter only - that South Africa belongs to all those who live in it, black and white - which is the most fundamental repudiation of racism and acceptable coexistence that I know of anywhere in the world. We went back further, and this is a tradition that I am very proud of as a lawyer, where in 1943 we drew up the African Claims Document. With the typical lack of arrogance of the ANC we sent this document to Churchill and Roosevelt. [Laughter.] This shows the degree of humility in the ANC that we sent it to them. [Applause.]
However, the important thing is that this is a precocious document. It had social and economic rights long before the universal declaration was even identified. In 1943 this document talked about the bill of rights, citizenship, commerce, education, industry and labour, land and discrimination. I commend this extraordinary first bill of rights by any liberation movement anywhere in the world. That is what we come from. We come from that background. If Dene Smuts had been here - and I say this in a comradely way - she would have looked at the rich history. Of course one can find fault. Of course errors were made; enormous errors were made.
On the other hand, much of our legislation, including legislation on affirmative action, but certainly the National Water Act, as I learned over the weekend too … The National Water Act, they say, is the most enlightened, progressive piece of water legislation. I say this for Afrikaner farmers too, by the way, because more water is made available. That is the important thing. They said it was the most progressive piece of legislation anywhere in the world. These were young people who crafted this, as part of the human rights dimension.
Can I end by saying, very quickly, that we are not in the worst position of all. We are not going to be self-congratulatory or self-indulgent. There are vulnerable groups we must talk about. This is still about racism. There are central things, like gender discrimination, immigrants, the disabled - as Comrade Nzimande rightly said - the rights of persons living in traditional societies, particularly women, refugees. I know of Guantánamo Bay where people’s beards are cut off. Do not forget that the most dehumanising thing is to affect the religious association of prisoners. [Interjections.] Please do not throw that out as a kind of ejaculation. There are other forms of ejaculations too! [Laughter.]
We also have to look at the question of genetic engineering and human rights. A very important issue is the responsibility of science in the context of human rights and the genome. And of course poverty is a fundamental violation of all human rights.
There are other areas of which we are very proud. By the way, I do not believe that the Constitution is an obstacle to the prosecution of criminals. I do not believe that the Constitution has rendered social rights a dead letter. I support the Grootboom case. I support the idea that these are rights which are recognisable in a court of law. It is the limits of judicial intervention that matter.
In the same way, I think that we should talk about the right to life. It is very odd that those who oppose abortion legislation, which supports the right of a woman to choose, are the most zealous in wanting to chop off heads, to execute people. [Laughter.] We celebrate the fact that we can finally debate these matters. It is an enormous thing that we are able to debate these matters. We can do so in this House and in our country, because the fundamental purpose of this is to strengthen our whole body politic.
A former United Nations Secretary-General said, and I quote:
One thing is certain: there can be no sustainable development …
We are going to use this later -
… without prioritising democracy.
Respect for fundamental human rights can only be clearly established when we strengthen the whole democratic framework in all its forms. I am proud to be associated with this Government, with this Parliament and with this extraordinary place called South Africa on this Human Rights Day. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, we will provide the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs with the Hansard of this speech, and trust that he will approve. Debate concluded.
NEW MEMBER
The Speaker announced that the vacancy caused by the death of Mr S Grové had been filled, in accordance with item 6(3) of Schedule 6 to the Constitution, 1996, by the nomination of Ms J T Ntuli with effect from 13 March 2002.
Ms J T Ntuli, accompanied by Miss P S Sekgobela and Mr G P Mngomezulu, made and subscribed the oath and took her seat.
The SPEAKER: I would like to welcome the member to the House. [Applause.]
DIVISION OF REVENUE BILL
(Consideration of Bill, as amended by NCOP, andof Report thereon)
There was no debate.
Report adopted and Bill agreed to.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON AFRICAN UNION
Report adopted without debate.
CONSIDERATION OF SECOND REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON AFRICAN UNION
Report adopted without debate.
CONSIDERATION OF THIRD REPORT OF WORKING GROUP ON AFRICAN UNION
Report adopted without debate.
COPYRIGHT AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill)
There was no debate.
Report, containing the following amendments, adopted:
CLAUSE 3
1. On page 3, in line 18, after "user" to insert "performer".
2. On page 3, after line 37, to add:
(3) In the event of any right to a royalty being assigned
to any successor in title, either by contractual
arrangement, operation of law, testamentary disposition or
otherwise, any successor in title shall be entitled to
enforce such right to a royalty against the person who in
terms of this section is obliged to pay or against his or
her successor in title.
Bill, incorporating the amendments contained in the report, agreed to.
PERFORMERS' PROTECTION AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill)
There was no debate.
Report, containing the following amendments, adopted:
CLAUSE 3
1. On page 4, in line 1, to omit "or his or her successor in
title".
2. On page 4, after line 14, to add:
(6) In the event of any right to a royalty being assigned
to any successor in title, either by contractual
arrangement, operation of law, testamentary disposition or
otherwise, any successor in title shall be entitled to
enforce such right to a royalty against the person who in
terms of this section is obliged to pay or against his or
her successor in title.
Bill, incorporating the amendments contained in the report, agreed to.
The House adjourned at 18:17. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
National Assembly:
- The Speaker:
(1) Bill passed by National Assembly on 20 March 2002: To be
submitted to President of the Republic for assent:
(i) Division of Revenue Bill [B 5D - 2002] (National Assembly
- sec 76).
(2) Bills passed by National Assembly on 20 March 2002, subject to
amendments contained in the report of the Portfolio Committee on
Trade and Industry thereon (see Announcements, Tablings and
Committee Reports, p ).
(i) Copyright Amendment Bill [B 73B - 2001] (National Assembly
- sec 75).
(ii) Performers' Protection Amendment Bill [B 74B - 2001]
(National Assembly - sec 75).
To be submitted to President of the Republic for assent once the
Bills, as amended by the House, have been printed. The Bills to be
submitted to the President will be the Copyright Amendment Bill [B
73D - 2001] and the Performers' Protection Amendment Bill [B 74D -
2001].
TABLINGS:
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces:
Papers:
- The Minister of Foreign Affairs:
Strategic Plan for the Department of Foreign Affairs for 2002-2005.
- The Minister of Defence:
(a) Agreement between the Government of the Republic of South Africa
and the Government of the State of Qatar concerning Co-operation
in the Military Field, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(b) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
Republic of South Africa and the Government of the People's
Republic of China concerning Defence Co-operation, tabled in terms
of section 231(3) of the Constitution, 1996.
(c) Arrangement between the Department of Defence of the Republic of
South Africa and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the
Netherlands, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(d) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
Republic of South Africa and the Government of the Republic of
Burundi concerning the South African Mission in Support of the
Implementation of the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement
for Burundi, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(e) Specific Arrangement between the Government of the Republic of
South Africa and the Kingdom of Belgium on The Funding of the
South African Protection Support Detachment in Support of the
Implementation of the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement
for Burundi, tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
(f) Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of the
Republic of South Africa and the United Nations contributing
Resources to the "Mission de l'Organisation des Nations Unies au
Congo" (MONUC), tabled in terms of section 231(3) of the
Constitution, 1996.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
National Assembly:
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the Copyright Amendment Bill [B 73B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 20 March 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having considered the Copyright Amendment Bill [B 73B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, p 238), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 73C
- 2001], as follows:
CLAUSE 3
-
On page 3, in line 18, after “user” to insert “performer”.
-
On page 3, after line 37, to add:
(3) In the event of any right to a royalty being assigned to any successor in title, either by contractual arrangement, operation of law, testamentary disposition or otherwise, any successor in title shall be entitled to enforce such right to a royalty against the person who in terms of this section is obliged to pay or against his or her successor in title.
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry on the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill [B 74B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 20 March 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, having considered the Performers’ Protection Amendment Bill [B 74B - 2001] (National Assembly - sec 75) and proposed amendments of the National Council of Provinces (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, p 238), referred to the Committee, reports the Bill with amendments [B 74C - 2001], as follows:
CLAUSE 3
-
On page 4, in line 1, to omit “or his or her successor in title”.
-
On page 4, after line 14, to add:
(6) In the event of any right to a royalty being assigned to any successor in title, either by contractual arrangement, operation of law, testamentary disposition or otherwise, any successor in title shall be entitled to enforce such right to a royalty against the person who in terms of this section is obliged to pay or against his or her successor in title.
-
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Finance on the Division of Revenue Bill [B 5D - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 76), dated 20 March 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Finance, having considered the Division of Revenue Bill [B 5D - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 76), amended by the National Council of Provinces and referred to the Committee, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
Report to be considered.
-
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Housing on the Disestablishment of South African Housing Trust Limited Bill [B 3 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), dated 20 March 2002:
The Portfolio Committee on Housing, having considered the subject of the Disestablishment of South African Housing Trust Limited Bill [B 3 - 2002] (National Assembly - sec 75), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B 3A - 2002].